Not much left to add after Finn's list, but those may be interesting as well:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2011/October#High_search_engine_rankings_of_Wikipedia_articles_found_to_be_justified_by_quality (In "1000 queries, Yahoo showed the most Wikipedia results within the top 10 lists (446), followed by MSN/Live (387), Google (328), and Ask.com (255)".) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-03-07/In_the_news#Google_algorithm_update (caused Wikipedia to rise from 7578 to 8050 (+6.2%) presences in the first search result page, in a sample of around 60,000 keywords.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2006-11-06/Search_and_Wikipedia ("Wikipedia appeared in the top 10, thus putting it on the first page of results, on 81% of searches using Google and 77% for Yahoo.") http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportGoogle.htm ("Google referred to our sites, through its services including search, maps, and Google Earth, 212,902,650 page views per day, representing 41.1% of our external page requests. ") On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:59 AM, Finn Årup Nielsen <f...@imm.dtu.dk> wrote: > Hi Phoebe (and others on the list), > > > > On 13-11-2012 21:47, phoebe ayers wrote: > > Are there any solid estimates out there of how many Google [or other] >> searches have a Wikipedia article as the first [or second or third...] >> hit? Any language breakdowns of this would be super cool as well. >> > > If you look in my "Wikipedia research and tools: Review and comments." > http://www2.imm.dtu.dk/pubdb/**views/edoc_download.php/6012/** > pdf/imm6012.pdf<http://www2.imm.dtu.dk/pubdb/views/edoc_download.php/6012/pdf/imm6012.pdf> > on page 15 "Popularity" you see a couple of studies using a sample of > pages: > > "Seeking health information online: does Wikipedia matter?" > http://jamia.bmj.com/content/**16/4/471.long<http://jamia.bmj.com/content/16/4/471.long> > > http://www.conductor.com/blog/**2012/03/wikipedia-in-the-** > serps-appears-on-page-1-for-**60-of-informational-34-** > transactional-queries/<http://www.conductor.com/blog/2012/03/wikipedia-in-the-serps-appears-on-page-1-for-60-of-informational-34-transactional-queries/> > > http://www.**intelligentpositioning.com/**blog/2012/02/wikipedia-page-** > one-of-google-uk-for-99-of-**searches/<http://www.intelligentpositioning.com/blog/2012/02/wikipedia-page-one-of-google-uk-for-99-of-searches/> > > The first one reports around 35% health related queries having Wikipedia > on top of of the Google result list. > http://jamia.bmj.com/content/**16/4/471/T1.expansion.html<http://jamia.bmj.com/content/16/4/471/T1.expansion.html> > > > I've seen offhand references to this phenomenon in many papers, but >> I'm wondering if someone on this list knows of a particularly good >> estimate or reliable information. >> > > > Google has become 'bubbled'. You could try DuckDuckGo instead, e.g., > > http://duckduckgo.com/?q=**Alzheimer+region%3Anone<http://duckduckgo.com/?q=Alzheimer+region%3Anone> > > See also: http://dontbubble.us/ > > > /Finn > > > ______________________________**_________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > Wiki-research-l@lists.**wikimedia.org<Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wiki-**research-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l> > -- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
